Network Computing is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Why Not Mirror In The Volume Manager?: Page 2 of 2

At the low end, some server-based array products support synchronous replication to make up for their single points of failure at the motherboard and/or disk controller. Unfortunately, I've seen that actually using this feature can have a significant negative impact on disk I/O performance. It may just be asking too much from a server motherboard to manage a bunch of storage and keep a doppelganger in sync at all times. Mirroring at the host could provide the single point of failure avoidance with a smaller performance impact.

Clearly, host replication isn't a replacement for synchronous replication. I wouldn't want to mirror a host to arrays in different data centers if there were any significant latency from the server to the more distant array. Even 100 microseconds of additional latency would make a mirrored pair of arrays feel more like a SATA and a SAS mirrored together with performance matching the slower of the pair.

Other than "it's just wrong," why don't more users mirror from the host? Comments, and reasons, welcome.